Abstract

Objective

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping for endometrial cancer (EC) is a contemporary technique that could provide benefits over traditional lymphadenectomy. Comprehensive published literature on sentinel lymph node mapping for laparoscopy surgery in EC, data extraction, evidence-based medicine-based methods, and meta-analysis are carried out to further explore sentinel lymph node mapping in laparoscopy surgery in EC. The application value provides basis for prevention and treatment of EC.

Materials and methods

We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central for studies published before February 1, 2018 which had a sample size of at least ten patients, and reported the detection rate and/or sensitivity of the laparoscopy SLN biopsy. Statistical analysis was conducted using R-2.15.2 software.

Results

The overall detection rate of sentinel lymph node mapping was included in 389 patients of 8 studies, ranging from 25 to 71 patients, which was 96% (95% confidence interval 95–98). 366 patients were included in bilateral sentinel node detection rate, ranging from 30 to 71 patients; it was 73% (95% confidence interval, 69–77). The sensitivity of the overall detection rate of sentinel lymph node mapping was 96.3% with a sensitivity of 73.1% bilateral sentinel node detection rate.

Conclusions

Laparoscopy sentinel lymph node localization is feasible and accurately predicts lymph node status in patients with EC. For patients with early stage clinical disease, it is very important to screen patients with no lymph node metastasis, reduce the range of surgical resection, reduce the incidence of the corresponding complications, and improve the quality of patients.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. All authors have had full control of all primary data and agree to allow the Journal to review their data if requested.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors. All analyses were based on previous published studies, thus no ethical approval and patient consent are required.